Charlie Kirk was known as one who never shied away from debate. From high school and college campuses, through his public appearances and his media platforms, he frequently engaged with opposing views. He asked hard questions, welcomed challenges, and defended his convictions. In doing so, he stood (often contentiously) for the principle that free speech, the right to speak, dispute, and argue is essential in a healthy society.

He was a Christian who believed that his faith should inform his values and shape his public engagement. For many, that was inspiring: a reminder that beliefs need not be hidden behind closed doors but may be part of the light we bring into public discourse. His life was a testimony to the conviction that faith and politics are intertwined: that moral and spiritual convictions have something to offer in how societies choose, legislate, and govern.

Importantly, Charlie Kirk consistently spoke against violence as a means of political change. “When discourse ends, violence begins.” – Charlie Kirk. He believed that even in disagreement, civility, law, order, and peace must be preserved. That someone who held non-violent debate in such high regard would perish by violence is a tragedy that offends deeply both the conscience and the norms of free society.

How far we have drifted from the wisdom once expressed by the philosopher who declared, “I may not agree with what you say, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it.” For many, it now seems justifiable to assassinate someone whose opinions they find offensive, or with whom they disagree. The number of TikTok videos openly celebrating the murder is nothing short of chilling. In the same way they tried to silence JFK, Martin Luther King, Steve Biko, we see the use of violence to try to stop the discourse of opinions.

The shock of this killing is what it signifies: growing turbulence in our public spaces, where speech is contested, where ideas clash, and where rhetoric breaks into violence. When someone invited to debate, who publicly stood for dialogue, becomes a target, it places us all in danger.

Freedom of speech is not merely about allowing voices we like; it is about protecting even those whom some find controversial. It is about ensuring that ideas are tested, questioned, refined. In that sense, Charlie’s willingness to debate anybody stands as part of his legacy: a courageous affirmation of discourse over silence.

As Christians, as citizens, we believe that faith has a role in politics, not to coerce, but to inform: to encourage compassion, justice, truth, service, and humility. Charlie’s public witness showed that belief in Jesus Christ should, and often does, translate into political conviction, moral critique, and societal engagement.

His faith was not a private accessory but a source of conviction about human dignity, law, justice, and the need for peace. In a world increasingly polarised, that insistence upon faith-rooted values matters deeply. Although we might differ in certain views and alignment, human dignity and mutual tolerance must prevail. Love your neighbour as you love yourself.

As a Christian, it shakes me to the core every time I hear ‘Jesus Christ’ used as a curse word. Yet I have never called for the discipline or even death of a person who does. I understand the right of each person to their own convictions.

People of goodwill, across political, religious, and ideological divides, should learn from Charlie Kirk’s life to defend the right to be heard, the right to disagree, and the right to express convictions regardless of popularity; to debate, challenge, listen, and correct without resorting to threats or violence; to stand for non-violence in public life, as violence only undermines the possibility of constructive dialogue and degrades our shared humanity; and to let faith inform action by offering compassion, integrity, and truth, not coercion or extremism.

Let faith be a guide to justice, service, peace.

We must honour Charlie Kirk’s life for his boldness, his convictions, his willingness to challenge and to be challenged. His untimely death is a sobering reminder that the defensible rights, speech, belief, public engagement, require constant vigilance. May his passing deepen our resolve to create a society in which ideas are debated rather than censored, in which faith is respected rather than maligned, in which violence is rejected rather than normalised.

Let us refuse to be silenced by fear. Let us commit to defending the vulnerable, upholding the right of every person to speak their conscience. Above all, let us resolve to do so in the spirit of Christ, never with hatred, but always with love. May his family find comfort, and all of us find renewed commitment to the values he carried. With sorrow and hope.

Pastor Bert Pretorius is President of the South African Community of Faith-Based Fraternals and Federations.